Introduction of Socialism or Exposure of Embezzlement?

Original Russian title: Введение социализма или раскрытие казнокрадства?
Date: 1917-04-29
Source: ru:PSS/v32
Translation: AI translation by Claude (Anthropic)
Note: This is an AI-generated translation from Russian. While striving for
accuracy, readers should consult the original Russian text for authoritative
reference.
================================================================================

It has been decided and signed that socialism cannot be introduced in Russia. This was proven—almost entirely in Marxist fashion—by Mr. Milyukov at a conference of Third-of-June bison, following the Menshevik-ministerial "Rabochaya Gazeta." This was agreed to by the largest party—both in Russia generally and at the Congress of Soviets in particular—the Socialist-Revolutionary Party, which is not only the largest party but also experiences the greatest ideological (disinterested) fear of the continuation of the revolution in the direction of socialism.

Actually, a simple reference to the resolution of the Bolshevik conference of April 24-29, 1917 shows that the Bolsheviks also recognize the immediate "introduction" of socialism in Russia as impossible.

What then is the dispute about? What is the noise for?

Because by shouting against the "introduction" of socialism in Russia, they support (many without realizing it) the efforts of those who resist the exposure of embezzlement.

Let us not argue about words, citizens! This is unworthy not only of "revolutionary democrats," but even of adults in general. Let us not talk about the "universally" rejected "introduction" of socialism. Let us talk about the exposure of embezzlement.

When capitalists work for defense, i.e., for the treasury, this is already—it's clear—not "pure" capitalism, but a special kind of national economy. Pure capitalism is commodity production. Commodity production is work for an unknown and free market. But a capitalist "working" for defense "works" not at all for the market, but by order of the treasury, very often even with money received by him as a loan from the treasury.

In our opinion, concealment of the size of profit from this peculiar operation and appropriation of profit beyond what is needed to cover the living expenses of a person actually participating in production, is embezzlement.

If you do not share this view, then you obviously disagree with the overwhelming majority of the population. There is not a shadow of doubt that the workers and peasants of Russia in their gigantic mass share this opinion and that they would directly express it if the question were put to them without evasions, without excuses, without diplomatic cover-ups.

And if you do share it, let us together fight against tricks and excuses.

In order to be most accommodating in such a joint enterprise as this struggle, in order to show maximum mildness, we allow ourselves to propose to the Congress of Soviets the following draft resolution:

a) from any Soviet of workers' or soldiers' or peasants' deputies;

b) from any trade union of workers or employees, etc.;

c) from any large political party (with an exact definition, at least by the number of voters, of the concept: "large" party)".

Everyone agrees that the immediate introduction of socialism in Russia is impossible.

Does everyone agree that the exposure of embezzlement is immediately necessary?

Pravda No. 77, June 22 (9), 1917

Printed from the text of the newspaper Pravda